do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-138/17: Action brought on 28 February 2017 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED)
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017129EN.01002902.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/29





Action brought on 28 February 2017 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED)
(Case T-138/17)
(2017/C 129/44)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Prim, SA (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: L. Broschat García, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik GmbH (Halberstadt, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘PRIMED’ No 5 154 182

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2016 in Joined Cases R 2494/2015-4 and R 163/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-257/16: Order of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — NM v European Council (Action for annulment — EU-Turkey statement of 18 March 2016 — Press release — Concept of ‘international agreement’ — Identification of the author of the act — Scope of the act — Meeting of the European Council — Meeting of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States of the European Union held on the premises of the Council of the European Union — Capacity of the representatives of the Member States of the European Union during a meeting with the representative of a third country — First paragraph of Article 263 TFEU — Lack of jurisdiction)
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Türkiye, agreement (EU), aid to refugees, international agreement, jurisdiction, migratory movement, press release








C_2017121EN.01003201.xml










18.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/32





Order of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — NM v European Council
(Case T-257/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - EU-Turkey statement of 18 March 2016 - Press release - Concept of ‘international agreement’ - Identification of the author of the act - Scope of the act - Meeting of the European Council - Meeting of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States of the European Union held on the premises of the Council of the European Union - Capacity of the representatives of the Member States of the European Union during a meeting with the representative of a third country - First paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Lack of jurisdiction))
(2017/C 121/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NM (represented by: B. Burns, Solicitor, P. O’Shea and I. Whelan, Barristers)

Defendant: European Council (represented by: K. Pleśniak, Á. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado and S. Boelaert, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of an alleged agreement concluded between the European Council and the Republic of Turkey dated 18 March 2016 and entitled ‘EU-Turkey statement, 18 March 2016’.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed on the ground of the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to hear and determine it.










2.


There is no need to rule on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the European Commission.










3.


NM and the European Council shall bear their own costs.










4.


The Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the Commission shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017064EN.01000401.xml










28.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/4





Euro exchange rates (1)

27 February 2017
(2017/C 64/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0587 




JPY


Japanese yen


118,87 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4331 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85280 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5548 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0664 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,8383 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


307,69 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3148 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5129 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,8100 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3796 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3889 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2164 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,4701 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4878 




KRW


South Korean won


1 200,05 




ZAR


South African rand


13,7155 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2756 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4280 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 147,30 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6990 




PHP


Philippine peso


53,193 




RUB


Russian rouble


61,1026 




THB


Thai baht


36,901 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,2916 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,9539 




INR


Indian rupee


70,6120 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-123/17: Action brought on 28 February 2017 — Exaa Abwicklungsstelle für Energieprodukte v ACER
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: electrical energy, energy law, judicial proceedings








C_2017129EN.01002602.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/26





Action brought on 28 February 2017 — Exaa Abwicklungsstelle für Energieprodukte v ACER
(Case T-123/17)
(2017/C 129/40)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Exaa Abwicklungsstelle für Energieprodukte AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: B. Rajal, lawyer)

Defendant: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 17 February 2017 given by the Board of Appeal of the defendant in Case A-001-2017 (consolidated) concerning the rejection of the application for leave to intervene lodged by the applicant; and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law:






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 11 of the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Appeal of the defendant and infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, since the Board of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant had no legitimate interest in the outcome of the appeal proceedings.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU (serious failure to state reasons).










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to be heard, since the Board of Appeal failed to notify the applicant of the position taken by the defendant in relation to the application made by the applicant for leave to intervene.
Case T-788/14: Order of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — MPF Holdings v Commission
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, United Kingdom, control of State aid, electrical energy, electricity supply, energy production, energy supply, price of energy








C_2017178EN.01003302.xml










6.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/33





Order of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — MPF Holdings v Commission
(Case T-788/14) (1)

(2017/C 178/49)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.
Case C-105/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 28 February 2017 — Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite v Evelina Kamenova
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising, consumer protection, merchant, natural person, sale, unfair terms of contract








C_2017144EN.01003201.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/32





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 28 February 2017 — Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite v Evelina Kamenova
(Case C-105/17)
(2017/C 144/41)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Varna

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite

Respondent: Evelina Kamenova

Question referred







1.


Must Article 2(b) and (d) of Directive 2005/29/ЕC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair commercial practices be interpreted as meaning that the action of a natural person who is registered on a website for the sale of goods, and who published a total of eight advertisements at the same time for the sale of different items via the website, is the action of a trader within the meaning of the legal definition in Article 2(b), represents a business-to-consumer commercial practice within the meaning of Article 2(d) and comes within the scope of the directive pursuant to Article 3(1) thereof?






(1)  Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (Text with EEA relevance).

OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22.
Case C-102/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Contas (Portugal) lodged on 28 February 2017 — Secretaria Regional de Saúde dos Açores v Ministério Público
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, competition policy, invitation to tender, works contract








C_2017151EN.01002101.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/21





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Contas (Portugal) lodged on 28 February 2017 — Secretaria Regional de Saúde dos Açores v Ministério Público
(Case C-102/17)
(2017/C 151/27)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal de Contas

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Secretaria Regional de Saúde dos Açores

Defendant: Ministério Público

Question referred

Must Article 58(4) of Directive No 2014/24/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that described [that is, Article 40(3) and (5)(c) of Regional Legislative Decree No 27/2015/A of 29 December 2015], which, in the area of public procurement, allows a geographical criterion, requiring three public contracts to have been performed previously in the same autonomous region, to be imposed as a qualifying criterion?


(1)  Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC

OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65.
Case C-167/15: Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale civile di Roma — Italy) — X v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: help for victims, indemnification, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU








C_2017161EN.01001701.xml










22.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/17





Order of the President of the Court of 28 February 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale civile di Roma — Italy) — X v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
(Case C-167/15) (1)

(2017/C 161/22)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 245, 27.7.2015.
Withdrawal of Commission proposals
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: proposal (EU)




C_2017064EN.01000501.xml










28.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/5





WITHDRAWAL OF COMMISSION PROPOSALS
(2017/C 64/05)

List of withdrawn proposals








Document


Inter-institutional procedure


Title





Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs






COM/2011/0121


2011/0058/CNS


Proposal for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB)
Case T-157/14: Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — JingAo Solar and Others v Council (Dumping — Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China — Definitive anti-dumping duty — Undertakings — Action for annulment — Interest in bringing proceedings — Admissibility — Exporting country — Scope of the investigation — Sampling — Normal value — Definition of the product concerned — Time limit for the adoption of a decision on a market economy treatment claim — Temporal application of new provisions — Injury — Causal link)
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, photovoltaic cell, semi-metal








C_2017121EN.01002201.xml










18.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/22





Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — JingAo Solar and Others v Council
(Case T-157/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Undertakings - Action for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Exporting country - Scope of the investigation - Sampling - Normal value - Definition of the product concerned - Time limit for the adoption of a decision on a market economy treatment claim - Temporal application of new provisions - Injury - Causal link))
(2017/C 121/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: JingAo Solar Co. Ltd (Ningjin, China) and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex (represented initially by A. Willems, S. De Knop and J. Charles, and subsequently by A. Willems and S. De Knop, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, acting as Agent, B. O’Connor, Solicitor, and S. Gubel, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, and subsequently by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 of 2 December 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 325, p. 1), in so far as it applies to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JingAo Solar Co. Ltd, and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.
Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus apply
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Belarus, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, personal data








C_2017064EN.01000301.xml










28.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/3





Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus apply
(2017/C 64/03)
The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1):
The legal basis for this processing operation is Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 (2).
The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director-General of DG C (Foreign Affairs, Enlargement, Civil Protection) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is the Unit 1C of DG C that can be contacted at:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




DG C 1C




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu




The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 765/2006.
The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil listing criteria as laid down in that Regulation.
The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the Statement of Reasons and any other data related thereto.
The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.
Without prejudice to restrictions provided for in Article 20(1)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, requests for access, as well as requests for rectification or objection will be answered in accordance with Section 5 of Council Decision 2004/644/EC (3).
Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the asset freeze or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.
Data subjects may have recourse to the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.


(1)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 134, 20.5.2006, p. 1.

(3)  OJ L 296, 21.9.2004, p. 16.
Case T-767/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — Labeyrie v EUIPO — Delpeyrat (Representation of a sowing of light coloured fish on a dark background) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark representing a sowing of light coloured fish on a dark background — Declaration of revocation — Genuine use of the mark — Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Form that differs in elements does not alter the distinctive character)
Date: 2017-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fish product, foodstuff, preserved product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017121EN.01002802.xml










18.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/28





Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — Labeyrie v EUIPO — Delpeyrat (Representation of a sowing of light coloured fish on a dark background)
(Case T-767/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark representing a sowing of light coloured fish on a dark background - Declaration of revocation - Genuine use of the mark - Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Form that differs in elements does not alter the distinctive character))
(2017/C 121/41)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Labeyrie (Saint-Geours-de-Maremne, France) (represented by: A. Lecomte, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Delpeyrat (Saint-Pierre-du-Mont, France) (represented by: J. Ennochi, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 October 2015 (Case R 2694/2014-1), relating to revocation proceedings between Depeyrat and Labeyrie.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Labeyrie to bear its own costs as well as those incurred by EUIPO;










3.


Orders Delpeyrat to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.